Presidency Dismisses Atiku’s US Lobbying Reports As Political Gambit

The Presidency has dismissed reports being circulated by a United States lobbying firm linked to former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar over records concerning President Bola Tinubu, describing the campaign as politically motivated ahead of the 2027 general elections.

The Special Adviser to the President on Media and Public Communications, Sunday Dare, made the position known in a statement issued on Tuesday, titled, “Speculation as Classified Information: Atiku’s $1.2 million Lobbying Gamble Exposed.”

Dare accused the Washington-based lobbying firm, Von Batten-Montague-York, L.C., of presenting political claims as intelligence and creating the impression that its pronouncements represented the position of the US government.

He said publicly available filings under the United States Foreign Agents Registration Act showed that Atiku had engaged the firm on a 12-month retainer reportedly worth $1.2 million.

According to the presidential aide, the lobbying activities were aimed at exploiting historical US records relating to Tinubu for political advantage ahead of the 2027 election.

Dare particularly rejected reports emanating from Washington which he said had been presented as reflecting the position of the US government.

“The incendiary press releases being carefully churned out from Washington are public relations propaganda sheets passed off as the view of the U.S. Government. They are not,” he said.

He challenged those making the allegations to produce the purported classified intelligence report and identify the sources of the information being circulated.

“Sane minds must categorically dismiss these reports as fabricated, politically motivated, and entirely unsupported by evidence,” Dare said.

He argued that the reports contained neither intelligence documents nor named US officials capable of substantiating the claims.

The presidential aide also questioned the authority of Karl Von Batten, founder of the lobbying firm, to speak on behalf of the US government.

“Dr. Karl Von Batten’s comments represent solely the position of an individual associated with Atiku-linked political interests, not the U.S. government or President Trump,” Dare said.

The controversy centres on historical records held by US federal agencies concerning Tinubu, including documents connected to a 1990s civil forfeiture proceeding involving funds forfeited to American authorities.

However, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria and member of Tinubu’s legal team in the US, Wole Afolabi, said the ongoing legal challenge over the release of some of the records was based on provisions of US law.

Speaking on Channels Television’s *Sunday Politics*, Afolabi said US authorities had already released thousands of pages of documents, but some portions remained redacted over concerns involving law enforcement methods, sources and agents.

He maintained that Tinubu’s lawyers were exercising rights available under American law by challenging the release of the redacted portions.

“This matter has been going on for quite some time, as you rightly said, and the DEA and other government agencies have produced documents and made available to Mr Greenspan,” Afolabi said.

He explained that the legal team’s objection was not aimed at concealing incriminating information but at ensuring that the disclosure process complied with the applicable law.

“So precisely what we are doing is going under the coverage of the law. It’s what the law gives us the right to do. It would amount to professional malpractice on our part if we don’t take advantage of what the law offers,” he said.

Afolabi also rejected suggestions that US authorities were withholding the documents to protect Tinubu.

He said a recent filing by the US Department of Justice indicated that the concern was the protection of the methodology used in gathering information, rather than shielding the Nigerian president.

“No mention was made of any protection being offered to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu,” he said.

The lawyer further argued that any evidence sufficient to establish drug trafficking against Tinubu would have resulted in criminal prosecution by US authorities.

On the approximately $460,000 forfeited to US authorities in the 1990s, Afolabi maintained that the civil forfeiture proceeding should not be interpreted as a criminal conviction or finding of criminal culpability.

The dispute comes as political parties and presidential hopefuls begin positioning themselves for the 2027 elections, with Tinubu expected to seek re-election and Atiku emerging as one of the leading opposition figures.